Conference Content

Learn more about who, what, when, and where.
2 of 4
Next

In & Out of the Hub

This is your portal to access more content in the Virtual Hub.
1 of 4
Next

Live Content

On these streams you will find live content happening during the conference.
4 of 4
Close

Connect with others

These spaces are built specifically for you to connect with others at the conference.
3 of 4
Next
← Back to Agenda
Paper
Paper
Paper
March
9
0:20
-
1:30
UTC
Add to Calendar 03/09/2021 12:20 AM 03/09/2021 01:30 AM UTC Paper Session 10 Check out this session on the FAccT Hub. https://2021.facctconference.org/conference-agenda/session-10
Track Two

Paper Session 10

Session Chair:
Moderator:
Discussant:
Angele Christin
No items found.

Abstract

Ask a Question?
Join the Conversation

Algorithmic Impact Assessments and Accountability: The Co-construction of Impacts

Jacob Metcalf, Emanuel Moss, Elizabeth Anne Watkins, Ranjit Singh, Madeleine Clare Elish
View Paper

Abstract

Algorithmic impact assessments (AIAs) are an emergent form of accountability for entities that build and deploy automated decision-support systems. These are modeled after impact assessments in other domains. Our study of the history of impact assessments shows that "impacts" are an evaluative construct that enable institutions to identify and ameliorate harms experienced because of a policy decision or system. Every domain has different expectations and norms about what constitutes impacts and harms, how potential harms are rendered as the impacts of a particular undertaking, who is responsible for conducting that assessment, and who has the authority to act on the impact assessment to demand changes to that undertaking. By examining proposals for AIAs in relation to other domains, we find that there is a distinct risk of constructing algorithmic impacts as organizationally understandable metrics that are nonetheless inappropriately distant from the harms experienced by people, and which fall short of building the relationships required for effective accountability. To address this challenge of algorithmic accountability, and as impact assessments become a commonplace process for evaluating harms, the FAccT community should A) understand impacts as objects constructed for evaluative purposes, B) attempt to construct impacts as close as possible to actual harms, and C) recognize that accountability governance requires the input of various types of expertise and affected communities. We conclude with lessons for assembling cross-expertise consensus for the co-construction of impacts and to build robust accountability relationships.

Re-imagining Algorithmic Fairness in India and Beyond

Nithya Sambasivan, Erin Arnesen, Ben Hutchinson, Tulsee Doshi, Vinodkumar Prabhakaran
View Paper

Abstract

Conventional algorithmic fairness is West-centric, as seen in its sub-groups, values, and methods. In this paper, we de-center algorithmic fairness and analyse AI power in India. Based on 36 qualitative interviews and a discourse analysis of algorithmic deployments in India, we find that several assumptions of algorithmic fairness are challenged. We find that in India, data is not always reliable due to socio-economic factors, ML makers appear to follow double standards, and AI evokes unquestioning aspiration. We contend that localising model fairness alone can be window dressing in India, where the distance between models and oppressed communities is large. Instead, we re-imagine algorithmic fairness in India and provide a roadmap to re-contextualise data and models, empower oppressed communities, and enable Fair-ML ecosystems.

Live Q&A Recording

This live session has not been uploaded yet. Check back soon or check out the live session.